More judicial interference with parenting

Yahoo! News - Court: Mom's Eavesdropping Violated Law :
"Sheriff Bill Cumming asked [Carmen] Dixon, whose daughter was friends with [Oliver] Christensen [then 17], to be alert for any possible evidence. When Christensen called the Dixon house later, Lacey Dixon, then 14, took the cordless phone into her bedroom and shut the door. The mother hit the "speakerphone" button and took notes on the conversation — in which Christensen said he knew where the purloined purse was."

The state supreme court in Washinton has ruled that the Christensen must get a new trial because it was illegal for his 14-year old girlfriend's mother to listen in on their conversation. On the plus side, authorities do not plan to prosecute Mrs. Dixon for violating the state's wiretap statute.

Washington, like my own state of Pennsylvania and several others, requires all parties to consent to monitoring of phone conversations. Federal law only requires the consent of one party. The crazy idea here is that anyone has a right to an expectation of privacy in communicating with a child of 14 in that child's home, a privacy right that defeats the right of parents to supervise their children.

This case involved the strong-arm robbery of an elderly woman. But this case can have far-reaching implications for those who would involve children in criminal activities including sex crimes, drugs, and other offenses. I favor the federal rule and it should be clear that the parent of an unemancipated minor has the right to monitor telecommunications as if explicitly a party and the power to consent to monitoring on behalf of the minor child.

If criminals wish to hold private phone conversations about their crimes, they should only discuss those crimes with adults.